[Bug libstdc++/112314] Missing index assertions in basic_string_view

2023-12-06 Thread cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112314 --- Comment #10 from GCC Commits --- The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:4f74f6c7aa0820943ba0777dc41d69a969576e18 commit r11-11127-g4f74f6c7aa0820943ba0777dc41d69a969576e18 Author: Jonathan Wa

[Bug libstdc++/112314] Missing index assertions in basic_string_view

2023-12-06 Thread cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112314 --- Comment #9 from GCC Commits --- The releases/gcc-12 branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c5c57aa7e63da2e769f4fda6e2ec9e8bd0c7b344 commit r12-10029-gc5c57aa7e63da2e769f4fda6e2ec9e8bd0c7b344 Author: Jonathan Wak

[Bug libstdc++/112314] Missing index assertions in basic_string_view

2023-11-08 Thread cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112314 --- Comment #8 from CVS Commits --- The releases/gcc-13 branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:66d0abdf0ade07228eba4dedcd1a9da09960ef53 commit r13-8014-g66d0abdf0ade07228eba4dedcd1a9da09960ef53 Author: Jonathan Wake

[Bug libstdc++/112314] Missing index assertions in basic_string_view

2023-11-02 Thread redi at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112314 --- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely --- (In reply to Jose Dapena Paz from comment #2) > In any case, the failing test is actually passing -1, my understanding is > that that one should always assert no matter what we are passing as const > char*

[Bug libstdc++/112314] Missing index assertions in basic_string_view

2023-11-02 Thread redi at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112314 --- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely --- (In reply to Jose Dapena Paz from comment #5) > - The length is less than the possible pointer difference (checked with > numeric_limits). That seems too lenient to me, because for wchar_t, char16_t and c

[Bug libstdc++/112314] Missing index assertions in basic_string_view

2023-11-02 Thread redi at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112314 --- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely --- Created attachment 56494 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=56494&action=edit Check [ptr,end) and [ptr,ptr+n) ranges with _GLIBCXX_ASSERTIONS With this change we could add: __glibcxx_re

[Bug libstdc++/112314] Missing index assertions in basic_string_view

2023-11-02 Thread jdapena at igalia dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112314 --- Comment #5 from Jose Dapena Paz --- (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #4) > (In reply to Jose Dapena Paz from comment #2) > > In any case, the failing test is actually passing -1, my understanding is > > that that one should always a

[Bug libstdc++/112314] Missing index assertions in basic_string_view

2023-11-02 Thread cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112314 --- Comment #3 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:6afa984f47e16e8bd958646d7407b74e61041f5d commit r14-5085-g6afa984f47e16e8bd958646d7407b74e61041f5d Author: Jonathan Wakely Date:

[Bug libstdc++/112314] Missing index assertions in basic_string_view

2023-11-02 Thread jdapena at igalia dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112314 --- Comment #2 from Jose Dapena Paz --- (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #1) > For the second one, I did start work on a patch that attempts to verify that > the provided length is not more than __builtin_object_size. I can't remember >

[Bug libstdc++/112314] Missing index assertions in basic_string_view

2023-10-31 Thread redi at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112314 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever confirmed|0